By license regulator
Share of 142 new launchesCuraçao still dominates new launches by raw volume, but MGA and UKGC together account for nearly a third of the brands that pass our trust threshold.
By software stack
Share of provider integrations at launchPragmatic Play and Evolution Gaming are now nearly mandatory at launch — the cost of getting noticed in a crowded slots and live-casino market.
- Pragmatic Playslots, live casino 28%
- Evolutionlive dealer 23%
- NetEntclassic slots 17%
- Microgamingjackpots 12%
- Play'n GOmobile-first slots 10%
- Other providerslong tail 10%
Payment methods at launch
% of new casinos supporting each rail on day oneCards are still universal, but Apple Pay and crypto are now table-stakes for anything targeting mobile-first players.
| Visa / Mastercard | 95% | |
| Apple Pay | 62% | |
| Skrill / Neteller | 54% | |
| Crypto (BTC / ETH) | 41% | |
| Trustly / Pay N Play | 28% | |
| PayPal | 22% | |
| Bank transfer | 71% |
Bonus type at launch
Headline offer used on day oneThe welcome match is still the default opener, but no-deposit and crypto-welcome offers have eaten a meaningful slice of new-launch marketing in the last twelve months.
Survival rate
Of brands tracked from launchA new casino is easy to launch and hard to keep alive. Here is what the curve looks like once the welcome-bonus marketing budget runs out.
What kills a launch: payouts
The single best predictor of a casino disappearing inside a year is its payout track record in the first ninety days. Brands that started with same-day cash-outs and 24-hour KYC are five times more likely to still be running at the twelve-month mark than brands that flagged withdrawals for “additional review” on the first attempt. Slow payouts kill word-of-mouth before any affiliate budget can replace it.
What kills a launch: a thin library
Operators launching with fewer than four hundred slots and a single live-dealer studio almost universally pivot inside six months — usually by quietly bolting on a second provider in a way that breaks the bonus terms half their existing players signed up for. The smarter operators integrate three or four studios on day one and accept the lower margin for the first quarter.
What kills a launch: a license pivot
Roughly one in seven new brands quietly migrates its license inside the first year, almost always from a stricter jurisdiction to a softer one. The pivot itself is rarely the problem — the unannounced change to the player-protection regime is. We re-score any brand that pivots, and the drop is on average 0.8 spades.
Methodology
Updated quarterlyLaunch dates come from two sources we can verify independently: the regulator's public filing (or licence-issue record) and our own first-deposit timestamp, captured by the test wallet we open at every new operator within seventy-two hours of go-live. Where the two disagree by more than a week, we publish the later date and footnote the discrepancy. The register is rebuilt nightly, so a brand quietly going dark is reflected within twenty-four hours.
Every casino is re-scored on a rolling ninety-day cycle: bonus terms re-read, withdrawal time re-tested, license re-checked against the issuing authority's public list. The numbers above are the rolling twelve-month aggregate as of the date this page was last rebuilt — older snapshots are linked from the changelog. We do not weight by traffic, brand size, or affiliate commission; every licensed launch counts the same.
See the latest launches first.
Every brand counted above, ranked the same way as the main list — with live licence status, bonus terms re-read today, and our test-cash-out times.